Vincente Miramontes v. United States was a case heard by the US Supreme Court in 1863. The case involved Vincente Miramontes, who had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death in California state court. He appealed his conviction on the grounds that he had not received due process under the laws of Mexico, which governed California at the time of his crime. The Supreme Court held that although Mexican law did apply to criminal proceedings in California during this period, it did not provide for any specific procedural protections or rights beyond those provided by common law principles such as habeas corpus and trial by jury. Furthermore, since these protections were already available under American law at the time of Miramontes' conviction, there was no need for him to receive additional protection from Mexican statutes or regulations; thus his appeal was denied and he remained subject to execution according to Californian state laws.

In the case of Vincente Miramontes v. United States, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a Mexican citizen who had been living in California since before it became part of the United States could be convicted for violating federal laws against polygamy and bigamy. The majority opinion held that he could not because he was not subject to U.S. law at the time when he committed his alleged crimes, as those laws did not apply until after California joined the Union. However, Justice Field dissented from this ruling on two grounds: firstly, that Congress had authority over all territories acquired by treaty; and secondly, that even if Congress lacked such authority in this instance due to a lack of explicit language granting it power over foreign citizens within its borders, then any criminal acts committed by foreigners should still be punishable under state law rather than federal law anyway. He argued further that allowing criminals like Miramontes to escape punishment would set an undesirable precedent for other cases involving similar circumstances where justice might otherwise have been served if only applicable laws were enforced regardless of citizenship status or place of residence prior to annexation into U.S territory